this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
72 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10181 readers
525 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Vos said Protasiewicz would likely be violating the oath of office if she doesn't recuse herself from cases involving maps she called 'rigged.'

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Candelestine@lemmy.ca 73 points 1 year ago (5 children)

That's a clever line of attack, but having an opinion does not constitute a conflict of interest. Otherwise there would be a whole shit-ton of recusal happening every day.

A conflict of interest usually involves some form of monetary compensation or other fiscal benefit.

[–] Jaysyn@kbin.social 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You think the #fascist #GOP cares about that? All that matters to those #fascists is they have the numbers to remove her from the bench.

[–] Candelestine@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago

I'm discussing the specific choice of what rhetoric they decide to use, not why they are using it. Why they are using it is fairly obvious at this point.

There are many different lines, arguments, whatever that could be employed, though. By paying attention to which ones are specifically chosen, you can learn more about their target audience, which is larger than simply fans of a white, ultra-nationalist ethno-state. Hence their need to continue to use rationalizations like this, instead of being forthright about their intentions.

This one in particular surprised me, as I didn't foresee it. They're usually more predictable than that.

load more comments (3 replies)